The Official Photography Thread - Vol. 3

[Fong$tarr]

If size and weight are not a factor 100% the 70-200.

the 85mm is obviously an outstanding lens but I really like the versatility of the 70-200.

The 70-200's only downfall in the choice is that its obviously really large and that it "only" opens up to 2.8.

the downfalls of the 85mm 1.2 is that its a fixed lens and you're kinda SOL if you want any more reach.

i'll put it this way... when i shoot the 70-200 i dont say "man i wish i could have more bokeh than what 2.8 lets me get". I say "man this thing is such a **** to lug around"

BTW -- the 85mm 1.2 is surprisingly heavy af

I would go 70-200 all day long. I wouldnt wanna risk missing the shot saying im a prime guy

I've rented both lenses but oddly never used them that much when I had them. When I shot the 70-200mm, it was just to get some church shots which are just really boring from an art perspective. The 85mm was awesome but yes, slow to focus and missed its mark a lot. Every similar to my 50mm f/1.2. I have a super love hate for that lens but when it hits, it's great.

The thing I don't like about the 70-200mm might be more so the size (and of course the weight). I use a sling for daily use and then have my Incase pro bag to hold most of my stuff but with that lens in there, I can really only carry that and another lens. I can't imagine carrying a 70-200mm and a Tamron 15-30mm all in one bag as well as a Mefoto tripod. Backpacking in Europe is just going to be too painful with all that gear. Haha.

obvious answer is both...practical answer is the zoom, especially if you aren't doing portraits a 2.8 70-200 is just going to be more versatile with the reach it gives you than a prime lens? for travel you prolly should consider renting a 24-70 or a 24-105; just something that goes from wide to telephoto because that seems like a more common usable range rather than short telephoto to telephoto, and that way you won't be switching lenses that often and can save some space in your carry on...

I've read through forums where a lot of people say get both. I do think that might be the case in the long run but can only afford one first and want to get the right one. I've rented the 24-70mm and didn't like it as much but granted that was the version 1. I felt the sharpness was just not there and I'd rather lug a 24mm prime and a 50mm prime. The 24-105mm would be considered if they ever made a f/2.8 version. I just can't get down with an f/4 lens in that range.

 

[djyoung08]

If size and weight are not a factor 100% the 70-200.

the 85mm is obviously an outstanding lens but I really like the versatility of the 70-200.

The 70-200's only downfall in the choice is that its obviously really large and that it "only" opens up to 2.8.

the downfalls of the 85mm 1.2 is that its a fixed lens and you're kinda SOL if you want any more reach.

i'll put it this way... when i shoot the 70-200 i dont say "man i wish i could have more bokeh than what 2.8 lets me get". I say "man this thing is such a **** to lug around"

BTW -- the 85mm 1.2 is surprisingly heavy af

I would go 70-200 all day long. I wouldnt wanna risk missing the shot saying im a prime guy

I've rented both lenses but oddly never used them that much when I had them. When I shot the 70-200mm, it was just to get some church shots which are just really boring from an art perspective. The 85mm was awesome but yes, slow to focus and missed its mark a lot. Every similar to my 50mm f/1.2. I have a super love hate for that lens but when it hits, it's great.

The thing I don't like about the 70-200mm might be more so the size (and of course the weight). I use a sling for daily use and then have my Incase pro bag to hold most of my stuff but with that lens in there, I can really only carry that and another lens. I can't imagine carrying a 70-200mm and a Tamron 15-30mm all in one bag as well as a Mefoto tripod. Backpacking in Europe is just going to be too painful with all that gear. Haha.

shesh thats a lot of gear

makes me feel bad for my wedding assistant

the AF on the 85mm L II i got was actually consistently front focusing. I did a micro adjustment of it to +9 and i have not had a single issue with it since.

I am also not bothered by the AF speed at all... especially for taking portraits.

I keep forgetting you have a that 15-30. i love that lens and want to own it one day.

IDK man... i'd love to head what you go with but to me, the 70-200 is definitely more lens per dollar.

 

[Fong$tarr]

^^^^^Actually it is more coming down to who has the better deal. I am currently talks with a guy on Craigslist that has a 70-200 version 2 for $1500 practically brand new. If he responds back, I'll get that over the 85mm. I'd actually prefer to own this lens used rather than getting it new since I know both are tanks.

 

[djyoung08]

^^^^^Actually it is more coming down to who has the better deal. I am currently talks with a guy on Craigslist that has a 70-200 version 2 for $1500 practically brand new. If he responds back, I'll get that over the 85mm. I'd actually prefer to own this lens used rather than getting it new since I know both are tanks.

thats a good price. thats what i paid and im pretty sure it wasnt used more like 2-3 times.

I got my 85mm L used as well.

Actually every lens I own is used

 

[Nawzlew]

doggo

 

[ksteezy]

What did you upgrade to?

I wanna get the mark4 but I need to sell this first...

 

[kdawg]

For travel I'd definitely go with a zoom - more versatile and if you're walking all day you'll appreciate less stuff.

 

[Fozz]

For travel I'd definitely go with a zoom - more versatile and if you're walking all day you'll appreciate less stuff.

18-55? 35-70?

 

[kdawg]

I'd be tempted to get something like 18-135 or what I usually do is carry 2 - 17-50 and 70-300. I wouldn't want to be stuck with a fixed 85.

 

[timelessflight]

I'd be tempted to get something like 18-135 or what I usually do is carry 2 - 17-50 and 70-300. I wouldn't want to be stuck with a fixed 85.

Yea usually carry the 24-70 and 35mm for shooting indoors

 

[erdyawron]

 

[tokes99]

I've read through forums where a lot of people say get both. I do think that might be the case in the long run but can only afford one first and want to get the right one. I've rented the 24-70mm and didn't like it as much but granted that was the version 1. I felt the sharpness was just not there and I'd rather lug a 24mm prime and a 50mm prime. The 24-105mm would be considered if they ever made a f/2.8 version. I just can't get down with an f/4 lens in that range.

keep in mind that the 24-105 does have image stabilization, if that matters to you for low light...i guess it depends on what you think you will be doing while out there, do you expect that you will be shooting @2.8 most of the time or need 1.2? if so, why not just buy the 70-200 & rent the 85 then?

 

[jordansf]

About time I figured this sh*t out lol, the last page def helped out so good looking out y'all!

Woke up to surprise low fog yesterday morning and took off immediately. Still bummed I didn't wake up in time for sunrise but I was happy to get what I could. I only had 50% charge on both batteries so both flights were pretty quick.

NY trip is about 75% done but I had to take a quick break from it cause I couldn't help myself to edit these asap.

 

[remy]

saw the whole thing lining up through the viewfinder, i got several shoots of it as was developing, and what makes this even more funny to me was mother of the girl that got took out was standing a few feet from me saw it coming too & was laughing hysterically...the child on the other hand did not find it as funny, she didn't cry though, she thugged it out tough

lolol incredible dude ... Kid is a champ for not crying

Nawzlew Doggo looking stoic

 

[blueribbon23]

Quick family trip to Mt. Baldy in California...

 

[buckeyemindst8]

 

[whatscomplex]

Anyone got the MeFoto tripod? I need a sturdy, light one for landscape stuff. Was looking at the MeFoto Globetrotter Carbon Fiber.

I never traveled before to be honest, at least at an age I can remember, so I don't know how it works. I have trips planned for California and India this year. I can just attach the tripod to the outside of my camera backpack (personal item) right? It doesn't have to necessarily fit inside?

 

[Fong$tarr]

^^^^^Yes you can just bring it as a carryon. I am getting the MeFoto Roadtrip soon. Was thinking about the carbon one but I think the weight difference is minimal. The globetrotter seems too big imo but probably is the better tripod as far as it be more sturdy. I really wish I got the Roadtrip when it was on sale. I feel like I am paying way more than I'd like.

 

[manusousou]

Lately at home,

More on https://www.instagram.com/manvsovsov/, catch me on ig so I can give a follow to the NT fam.

 

[koziak]

^that second shot is amazing

 

[keko jones]

Nice shot JordanSF .... are you a pilot?

 

[Bruce Banner]

I need help , took this pic in Germany , it was pretty gloomy and dark that day . I shot witn Raw but I still need to tweak that picture and make it pop out a bit bring the colors out . Anybody willing to help me with Photoshop ?

 

[bjamez20]

Good stuff @JordanSF  - is that with a drone? Where do you launch from? My Phantom collects dust because it seems like everywhere out here is a no fly zone. 

 

[djyoung08]

Some shots from yesterday.

 

[dragicon]

Nice shot JordanSF .... are you a pilot?

I hope he is because if its a drone, its breaking FAA regulations.